The applicant union referred a grievance to arbitration under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging that the responding party employer failed to apply the collective agreement to certain work.
The central issue was whether various HVAC repair and service tasks performed by the employer constituted 'construction' or 'maintenance' work.
The Board analyzed a sample of work orders, applying the established test that construction involves additions or restoring a non-functioning system, while maintenance preserves an operating system.
The Board allowed the grievance for some work orders (found to be maintenance) and dismissed it for others (found to be construction or where the union failed to meet its evidentiary burden).
